Eric Newhill
New
Please do me the very big favour of NOT telling me how I feel and what I think? It's a very authoritarian way of communicating.
You do not understand what I believe until I tell you in my own words. People are individuals. We certainly have societal tendencies, but that
doesn't mean we all walk lock-step together.
Your dream is that they be in lockstep for the greater good. I know how you think a) because you've already said enough b) you're not very original
argument that the American forefathers were suspicious of government is a beautiful fiction.
They never intended the unwashed masses to rule themselves. That much is true.
Your use of the word "rule" confirms my opinion of you. The word "rule" never entered entered the founders' minds except as an example of what they didn't want.
American forefathers created very structured Republican governmental systems. If they were truly suspicious of government, they would have never given the President the power that he has. In Canada, there's no way a Prime Minister could declare war OR "police actions" in other nations on their own. For a government that wanted to be as "small as possible," they have a much larger government than most social democracies. America spends MUCH more money on social programs than Canada does per capita. The difference is they give it to massive corporations- corporate socialism.
Nope. The government has grown uncontrollably over time and became a real monster recently. It started with Licoln's illegal invasion of the South. There was no law saying that states couldn't leave the union. Indeed the states tacitly agreed to be members of a union as long as it was working for them. Then Johnson Great Society programs really expanded the evil that is centralized big govt. As De Toqueville observed, the US would remain a free and functioning republic until the politicians figured out they could bribe the people. He was most prescient.
2nd Amendment gun argument was all good when you have several thousands of people in the 17th century. Fast forward to even the
20th century, and such an amendment is a joke.
If you don't believe me. Ask how David Koresh did.
Do you HONESTLY think that the greatest military the world has ever seen with weapons that can kill you from remote drones without you even knowing will be defeated by a gang of people shooting their AK-47's from their Durango trucks?
Seriously?There is zero chance that guns will stop a government that has decided to take over its citizenry.
Spoken like a true sniveling big government leftist.
I'll let the Vietcong and the Taliban know that they and their AK-47s and pick-up trucks have no chance against the greatest military in the world.
And 40 million or more armed insurgents with control of the food producing regions of a geographically large country, and the enemy bottled up in a few big cities controlled by supply choke points, is something neither the VC or Taliban had in their favor.
You are also assuming,most incorrectly, that the military would just follow orders and fire on their neighbors. FYI, most of the military in combat arms (the fighters, not motor pool, supply, etc) would be on the freedom fighters side.
You obviously know nothing of military matters and should put a plug in your pie hole before speaking to such. Unless you like appearing ill educated and moronic.
is why GOOD GOVERNMENT as a requirement would be a smarter decision than hoping that guns will kill all the people you hate.
Instead, what you get is more people dying who are regular citizens because of ridiculous numbers of guns.
In fact, multiple studies show that the average American is more likely to kill themselves or their families than even bad guys let alone a corrupt
government.
Yeah sure. You and your lefty pals have figured out what good government is when all through history the answer to that question has been debated and fought over. Sheesh. Fantasize much?
Last edited: